Aziz Ansari Doesn't Pick Up On "Non-Verbal Cues" and Gets Treated Like A Rapist

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

So, here's the thing.

1. This guy is an actor.
2. He was very good with reading the non verbal yes
3. He suddenly became autistic when it was his turn to read the non verbal no?
4. He sends a "had a nice time yesterday" text and she responds negatively.
5. He apologizes.

So first of all, here's the thing, unless a chick has to explicitly say "yes dummy I'm giving you consent to have sex" there's a reasonable assumption that the opposite "ok stop I'm withdrawing consent" doesn't need to be explicitly said either. He's not autistic either, he's an actor...people that specialize in non verbal communication..

I think, this guy just wanted to have sex with her and then dump her, that's not illegal but whatever. He probably noticed her non verbal cues to stop but ignored it. Probably got worried next day morning so he decided to send a "hey had a nice time yesterday" in the hopes of getting a "yeah, i had a good time too" because most women wouldn't reply negatively out of fear of ruining further chance with the guy. She replies negatively and he apologizes. I personally think this guy is a sexual predator but that's just my point of view. It's no use talking about this now anyway, the fact is he is or isn't a predator is no longer relevant, everybody knows and his reputation is down the gutter...even if he is innocent. Just saying.

[Mermaid]

Are you sure she consented? 

Are you saying that allowing someone to take off your clothes is consent to have sex?

You're continuing to ignore the context of my comment.

No, actually, I don't know, so I wanted to ask. I was serious. This is a topic worth discussing.

---

Remove all context and in a vacuum if someone allows someone else to take off their clothes then it is  not consent to have sex but the context here is obviously different and so is the situation, obviously in this context in that situation taking off their clothes is "non verbal" consent. There's no questioning that. So two things :

1) guy could read the non verbal cues when she gave consent but suddenly became autistic when she gave non verbal cues to stop? Also, didn't you guys read her text reply? "hey had a good time with you" is so textbook I can't believe you guys couldn't see it, guys send that so the girl will reply something positive then he will have insurance if in the future she raises a complaint he can just show the text but instead her reply was negative.
2) just because she consented in the beginning doesn't mean she can't say stop at any time in between

And when she did actually say stop, I believe he did.

But then went in from another angle.

---

Are you sure she consented? 

Are you saying that allowing someone to take off your clothes is consent to have sex?

No. He's saying it's a non verbal cue. 

As the article I posted says, if you're going to rely solely on men picking up your "non verbal cues" to try to figure out whether or not you're wanting to get sexual, you better consider ALL the non verbal cues you're sending. Otherwise, use words.

I believe her account says she did use words, which he also did not respect. 
I am not saying he sexually assaulted her, but I think it's important to tease out the issues with this situation.

[GrandizerII]

So, here's the thing.

1. This guy is an actor.
2. He was very good with reading the non verbal yes
3. He suddenly became autistic when it was his turn to read the non verbal no?
4. He sends a "had a nice time yesterday" text and she responds negatively.
5. He apologizes.

So first of all, here's the thing, unless a chick has to explicitly say "yes dummy I'm giving you consent to have sex" there's a reasonable assumption that the opposite "ok stop I'm withdrawing consent" doesn't need to be explicitly said either. He's not autistic either, he's an actor...people that specialize in non verbal communication..

I think, this guy just wanted to have sex with her and then dump her, that's not illegal but whatever. He probably noticed her non verbal cues to stop but ignored it. Probably got worried next day morning so he decided to send a "hey had a nice time yesterday" in the hopes of getting a "yeah, i had a good time too" because most women wouldn't reply negatively out of fear of ruining further chance with the guy. She replies negatively and he apologizes. I personally think this guy is a sexual predator but that's just my point of view. It's no use talking about this now anyway, the fact is he is or isn't a predator is no longer relevant, everybody knows and his reputation is down the gutter...even if he is innocent. Just saying.

His next-morning text about how they had a fun night (ignoring all the struggles and pains of that night) was definitely bizarre.

[LadyForCamus]

That's not at all what anyone has been saying. No one called her dumb or a bitch. Those things might be true, but I don't know. I'm just pointing out that she didn't say no. She didn't leave. I never said she was a dumb bitch for not doing those things, simply that we, as women, can't call it assault when we give up the goods without crystal clear resistance. If women want men to have crystal clear consent, we ought to know how to give crystal clear dissent.

The dumb bitch part is the implication in the narrative (overall, not specifically you in this thread).  The unspoken answer to the 'why didn't she just say no and leave?' is that she's a dumb bitch.  It's why she's being attacked rather than sympathized with.  She needs to be dehumanized to make it okay so people can keep liking Parks and Rec and Master of None.  Again, not necessarily you, but I think this is the crux of the overall narrative.  And another group needs to dehumanize her to justify the actions, because they do the same thing.

Louis CK got verbal consent, I believe, before he pulled out his dick.  But even that wasn't really.  He just knew that put on the spot, they'd probably not stand up to him.  

I just don't believe 'be assertive' is as easy as people make it sound.  How many people don't ask for raises, or cave when asked to work overtime, or don't report sexual harassment, or stay in bad relationships, or get taken advantage of by friends, and on and on and on and on and on.  

Which brings me back to my original point, if you're a passive person, do you deserve what you get when someone takes advantage of you?  It doesn't seem like that should be the case.

I am an extremely passive person.  I hate confrontation, or displeasing anyone.  I’m practically a push over, but I’ll tell you what...if someone is touching me in a way that I don’t like, or want, they’re gonna know it.  If a woman is so passive that she is incapable of clearly verbalizing consent/non-consent during a sexual encounter, that’s a huge problem.  That’s a debilitating type of problem that is going to interfere with her everyday functioning, and she should seek out some support.  What’s her alternative?  Never go on a date again, because she can’t even speak up about not wanting to go back to the guy’s apartment?  Something is just not right about this encounter as it was reported, I’m sorry.

[Mermaid]

The dumb bitch part is the implication in the narrative (overall, not specifically you in this thread).  The unspoken answer to the 'why didn't she just say no and leave?' is that she's a dumb bitch.  It's why she's being attacked rather than sympathized with.  She needs to be dehumanized to make it okay so people can keep liking Parks and Rec and Master of None.  Again, not necessarily you, but I think this is the crux of the overall narrative.  And another group needs to dehumanize her to justify the actions, because they do the same thing.

Louis CK got verbal consent, I believe, before he pulled out his dick.  But even that wasn't really.  He just knew that put on the spot, they'd probably not stand up to him.  

I just don't believe 'be assertive' is as easy as people make it sound.  How many people don't ask for raises, or cave when asked to work overtime, or don't report sexual harassment, or stay in bad relationships, or get taken advantage of by friends, and on and on and on and on and on.  

Which brings me back to my original point, if you're a passive person, do you deserve what you get when someone takes advantage of you?  It doesn't seem like that should be the case.

I am an extremely passive person.  I hate confrontation, or displeasing anyone.  I’m practically a push over, but I’ll tell you what...if someone is touching me in a way that I don’t like, or want, they’re gonna know it.  If a woman is so passive that she is incapable of clearly verbalizing consent/non-consent during a sexual encounter, that’s a huge problem.  That’s a debilitating type of problem that is going to interfere with her everyday functioning, and she should seek out some support.  What’s her alternative?  Never go on a date again, because she can’t even speak up about not wanting to go back to the guy’s apartment?  Something is just not right about this encounter as it was reported, I’m sorry.

I can't agree with that. I think her reaction is pretty common, actually, and not pathological. She went out on a date with someone she liked after getting to know him via text. Switching gears is not always that simple.

[henryp]

Are you sure she consented? 

Are you saying that allowing someone to take off your clothes is consent to have sex?

No. He's saying it's a non verbal cue. 

As the article I posted says, if you're going to rely solely on men picking up your "non verbal cues" to try to figure out whether or not you're wanting to get sexual, you better consider ALL the non verbal cues you're sending. Otherwise, use words.

I don't know that getting naked for sex is consent for getting fingers jammed in your mouth.  If you're into some non-vanilla stuff, there should probably be the expectation for getting more consent.  Just like getting naked on the counter doesn't mean he should assume butt-sex is on the menu.  Or that he can cum in your hair.  Or choke you.  Or etc...

The system as it stands is certainly it's 100% on the woman to stop everything and clearly state no.  But that system is pretty spectacular for guys who just want to use women as fuck toys.  And it seems like a system optimized for those people might not be the best.  

And what's wild, is that the current standard is that if he does cum in your hair when you really didn't want him to, that women are just supposed to write it off as a 'lousy lay.'  

--

It's interesting the Louis CK thing being a justifiable career ruiner, because he was a big name comic and others were not as big names even though he had consent.  Trying to imagine the situation, I think I'd feel a lot more vulnerable if I was naked in someone's apartment and he started doing some weird shit to me, than if Louis CK said can I show you my dick?  Because it seems like you'd say 'no thanks', and it'd be over.  Whereas with sex stuff started in a celebrities apartment, when you're already naked, who knows what trying to stop things might lead to.

[LadyForCamus]

@lfc, I was actually directing that towards Am, he said "she took off her clothes what does that non verbally  communicate" so my point was that even if she agreed in the beginning if there is discomfort in between they should stop. The only problem is everyone is complaining and blaming the chick cos the chick didn't say "no" out loud but everybody is ignoring she didn't say "yes I consent"  in the beginning either? It's because people don't actually say "yes I consent" or "no I don't consent" out loud, that'd be weird. I mean, yeah, some chicks will say "stop" but some won't, that doesn't excuse the guy not being able to read that non verbal no when he was so adept at reading the non verbal yes.

Let me be clear...I am not blaming this woman for anything.  There is a difference between a discussion about personal responsibility, and blame.  All I’m saying is, I don’t see how, by her own account if things, she was the victim of a crime.

[Longhorn]

I agree with most of what she says, although I don’t feel as strongly about it.

[henryp]

I am an extremely passive person.  I hate confrontation, or displeasing anyone.  I’m practically a push over, but I’ll tell you what...if someone is touching me in a way that I don’t like, or want, they’re gonna know it.  If a woman is so passive that she is incapable of clearly verbalizing consent/non-consent during a sexual encounter, that’s a huge problem.  That’s a debilitating type of problem that is going to interfere with her everyday functioning, and she should seek out some support.  What’s her alternative?  Never go on a date again, because she can’t even speak up about not wanting to go back to the guy’s apartment?  Something is just not right about this encounter as it was reported, I’m sorry.

Has anything during this #Metoo movement made you think that women are good at standing up and saying No in vulnerable situations?  Nothing about her story seems out of the ordinary when compared with a lot of the other stories in terms of her inability to voice her concerns.  

I don't disagree about not being confident to verbalize non-consent is a huge problem, but it's not an uncommon problem.   And hopefully, society works on raising women to be more confident/comfortable in those situations.  But I don't think it means it's okay for everyone to go to town on the passive ladies while the getting is good either.  

The current status quo is great for really shitty men.

[Shell B]

Wasn't the Louis CK situation in professional settings? I might be remembering incorrectly. To be fair, I never thought that was assault, either, but it was definitely creep level 10.

Listen, I've been in situations like this woman is reporting enough times that it's familiar. When I was a teenager, I hung out with older guys. I froze like she did on at least two occasions. However, even at that age, I said no clearly. I didn't actively engage in any sexual acts. When I realized no wasn't going to cut it, I rag dolled instead of running. I get it. I understand more than the men who haven't suffered sexual assault putting forth these scenarios that it's complicated. I sympathize. I simply don't see it as more than creepy as hell if she didn't make herself unquestionably clear and either A. leave or B. continue to say no to his advances. If my husband said he was uncomfortable, I would assume he meant with how things were currently going. Switching gears to maybe oral seems like a natural thing to do. He would have to say, "I'm not in the mood for anything" for me to take that as his meaning. I guess I'm a sexual predator.